I'm showing you this not because I believe it, but because it's nice to know what clients will be freaking out about next. Seriously though, I can't figure out what they'd be looking for to determine that a site is "over optimized." It sounds like a bunch of bunk to me..
http://searchengineland.com/too-much-seo-google's-working-on-an-"over-optimization"-penalty-for-that-115627
QuoteMatt Cutts said the new over optimization penalty will be introduced into the search results in the upcoming month or next few weeks. The purpose is to "level the playing field," Cutts said. To give sites that have great content a better shot at ranking above sites that have content that is not as great but do a better job with SEO.
site:www.seomoz.org "over optimization penalty" : 31 results
site:www.webmasterworld.com "over optimization penalty" : 589 results
I must check those again on Monday!
I take "over optimization" as a vague umbrella term that gives them cover to hit whatever they want. Check out this Cutts comment:
QuoteWe are trying to make GoogleBot smarter, make our relevance better, and we are also looking for those who abuse it, like too many keywords on a page, or exchange way too many links or go well beyond what you normally expect.
Its the "beyond what you'd normally expect" phrase that is a big red flag, purposely vague.
Although I do believe in the FUD factor at play, their aggressive maneuvers at splog networks show they are serious. I didn't think they would get all of BMRs network, wrong on that one.
Yeh, taking down BMR was quite impressive. It's grey hat too imo - given the content has to be original - so Google really are on the warpath.
Quote from: JamesR on March 20, 2012, 08:48:56 PM
Its the "beyond what you'd normally expect" phrase that is a big red flag, purposely vague.
I suspect it means sandboxing filters have become more aggressive - certainly seen some suggestions of this on some test sites since the Dec update, though not enough information to really get details - other than lots of caution still possibly even more important with link volume for younger domains in competitive markets.